Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20351254›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2010

Analysis of diverse regulatory networks in a hierarchical context shows consistent tendencies for collaboration in the middle levels.

Nitin Bhardwaj, Koon-Kiu Yan, Mark B Gerstein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. SEPARATING THE CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES IN DISEASE TRANSCRIPTOME.Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing · 2016
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. On the origins of hierarchy in complex networks.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2013
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Nitin BhardwajProgram in Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, Yale University, Bass 426, 266 Whitney Avenue, New Haven, CT 06520, USA.
Koon-Kiu Yan
Mark B Gerstein

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gene regulatory networks have been shown to share some common aspects with commonplace social governance structures. Thus, we can get some intuition into their organization by arranging them into well-known hierarchical layouts. These hierarchies, in turn, can be placed between the extremes of autocracies, with well-defined levels and clear chains of command, and democracies, without such defined levels and with more co-regulatory partnerships between regulators. In general, the presence of partnerships decreases the variation in information flow amongst nodes within a level, more evenly distributing stress. Here we study various regulatory networks (transcriptional, modification, and phosphorylation) for five diverse species, Escherichia coli to human. We specify three levels of regulators--top, middle, and bottom--which collectively govern the non-regulator targets lying in the lowest fourth level. We define quantities for nodes, levels, and entire networks that measure their degree of collaboration and autocratic vs. democratic character. We show individual regulators have a range of partnership tendencies: Some regulate their targets in combination with other regulators in local instantiations of democratic structure, whereas others regulate mostly in isolation, in more autocratic fashion. Overall, we show that in all networks studied the middle level has the highest collaborative propensity and coregulatory partnerships occur most frequently amongst midlevel regulators, an observation that has parallels in corporate settings where middle managers must interact most to ensure organizational effectiveness. There is, however, one notable difference between networks in different species: The amount of collaborative regulation and democratic character increases markedly with overall genomic complexity.

Indexed as

Gene Expression RegulationGene Expression Regulation, BacterialGene Regulatory NetworksAnimalsEscherichia coliGenomeHumansMiceModels, BiologicalModels, GeneticModels, StatisticalMycobacterium tuberculosisPhosphorylationRatsSpecies Specificity

Identifiers

PMID20351254
PMCPMC2872381

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.